In re Jimmy P.

The State of California (plaintiff) filed a wardship petition, alleging that Jimmy P. (defendant), a juvenile, committed theft. Jimmy admitted to theft and was adjudicated to be a ward. Jimmy was placed under state supervision in his mother’s custody, but after he was charged with burglary, he was placed in a group facility, where he refused to follow the rules. Jimmy was placed in a second group facility, St. John’s School for Boys (St. John’s), but continued to have serious behavioral problems, resulting in his expulsion. The state filed a petition for the court to determine an appropriate placement for Jimmy, alleging that St. John’s expelled Jimmy for (1) fighting, (2) refusing to follow the rules, (3) truancy, (4) inciting others’ truancy, and (5) attempting to incite gang activity. In a plea agreement, Jimmy admitted that he had been truant and that St. John’s expelled him for truancy. In exchange for Jimmy’s admission, the state agreed to strike the remaining allegations from the petition. In determining Jimmy’s placement, the court admitted into evidence Jimmy’s probation officer’s report, which incorporated St. John’s written expulsion report. The expulsion report discussed facts relating to the stricken allegations. The court relied on the expulsion report in finding that there was no less restrictive alternative than to place Jimmy in a juvenile correctional facility. Jimmy appealed, arguing that the trial court improperly considered factors relating to the stricken allegations.